[s-cars] Bently Paper Manual

[Nicholas]

So let me get this straight:

1. I'm pretty sure no one has suggested that the paper version isn't
more valuable than electronic.

2. I've conceded that the paper manual is /quite/ valuable in almost
every post. Touche on quantification of said value!

Dead horses: beaten.

Judgement of how I deserve to be treated: apparently, still jerky.

And for the record, I never suggested that this list would be an
adequate substitute for a repair manual (that was someone else).

::le sigh::
-Nick


On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 5:05 PM, David Forgie <forgied at shaw.ca> wrote:
> Wylie: The In My High Horse Elitish Opinion (IMHHEO(tm)) was an in-joke to
> counter comments
>  by Emre Washburn on the old Audiworld S-cars forum.  I haven't used that in
> years as you should
> know.
>
> As for my comments about the price and value of the 3 volume Bentley C4
> manuals, I will stand by
>  my comments directed specifically at Nicholas.  If you do work on your own
> UrS4/S6, the manuals
>  easily pay for themselves the first time you complete a job. The fact that
> there are UrS-car DIYs
>  available on the internet does not negate the need for the Bentleys to
> confirm or deny the content of
>  the DIYs.  For those that do not mind staring at computer screen, the CD
> version is a viable
>  alternative.  However, if you are trying to track down a wiring issue, a CD
> will not help much
>  because you often need to have two pages tagged simutaneously.
>
> IMO
>
> Dave F.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Wylie Bean <theringmeister at triad.rr.com>
> Date: Monday, January 9, 2012 3:19 pm
> Subject: Re: [s-cars] Bently Paper Manual
> To: Nicholas <applen at gmail.com>, s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com, David
> Forgie <forgied at shaw.ca>
> Cc: S-CAR list <s-car-list at audifans.com>
>
>> Nick,
>> Dave didn't trademark the IMHHEO acronymn by accident!  :)
>>
>>
>> Wylie Bean
>> 90 cq
>> 91 90q20v
>> 92 UrS4
>> 08 Q7
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Nicholas <applen at gmail.com>
>> Sender: s-car-list-bounces at audifans.com
>> Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 16:05:34
>> To: David Forgie<forgied at shaw.ca>
>> Cc: s-car-list<s-car-list at audifans.com>
>> Subject: Re: [s-cars] Bently Paper Manual
>>
>> "The others were too polite" to me?
>>
>> wow!
>>
>> This list continues to amaze.
>>
>> Maybe my perception of "reasonable" pricing is different than yours
>> but I don't see how that should have afforded me less respectful
>> responses.
>>
>> Hopefully I'm miss-reading your response or have turned off my
>> sarcasmeter prematurely.
>>
>> I don't have a paper Bentley for my urS4 and have never tried to buy
>> one. But I do know that I bought a used (paper) Bentley for a
>> car that
>> is 6 years older than my S4 (and similarly out-of-print) for $50 from
>> a person on a corresponding chassis-specific-list for my other German
>> car.
>>
>> My apologies for assuming that depreciation (instead of
>> inflation) or
>> (any) price negotiation would occur in such a similar
>> situation/community. I clearly see that a lot of you are willing to
>> buy and sell for that price or higher: that's great!
>>
>> I would also like to apologize for any discomfort I've caused here.
>>
>> Respectfully,
>> -Nick
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 12:27 AM, David Forgie
>> <forgied at shaw.ca> wrote:
>> > Nicholas:  The others were too polite to you.  You have no
>> clue about the
>> > value of the paper
>> > version of the 3 volume (each about 2.5" thick) C4 Bentley
>> manuals.  They
>> > are no longer in print
>> > and only rarely come up for sale. $275 is a very reasonable
>> price.  I would
>> > gladly pay that for a
>> > set if I didn't already have a set (that took me about 5 years
>> to find).
>> > James's offer and price
>> > are completely fair and also a service to the UrS community
>> and this list in
>> > particular.
>> >
>> > Dave F.
>> _______________________________________________
>> S-CAR-List mailing list
>> http://audifans.com/mailman/listinfo/s-car-list
>> http://www.audifans.com/kb/List_information
>>